I’ve read a blog about AI phyton development for Wesnoth, they used an algorithm to find unique battle data on AI vs AI matches, to make their AI win something like 95-99% of the time.

I seem to recall that he used thousand of battle data matches and used a graph to find discrepancies from similar battle data using a tree graph.

Well, I think that was amazing in it’s own way... what caught my attention was thousands of battle data analysed using a set algorithm using gold, recruits, probably positions? well hmm can’t seem to recall exactly.

What stood out when he was testing his AI, is using and analysing thousands of battle records.

AI vs AI matches? They were learning how to create an AI probably, an educational project? And they didn't create an AI that wins strong playes, didn't they? AI that wins another AI 99% of the time doesn't say how it performs against human players. There is a very good AI viewtopic.php?f=15&t=43048 , but it can only play one specific faction on a specific map (which is one of the reasons of its strength I beleive, since it is tweaked specifically for that conditions). It took years of efforts afaik. I am not even trying to imagine how long will it take to create an AI of that level that can play all factions on any map.

You remind me one guy who likes to speak very loud, use trendy technical words, has his own opinion on every topic and tries to attract an attention. Unfortunately, he does not always understand what he is saying. But loud speech and buzzwords compensate for this, it can make an impression.

as a reasonably strong ladder player (albeit one who only plays northerners), i like the changes and philosophy. thanks for proposing them.

A reasonably strong player who plays only one faction and has a rating below the defined average value?

You should understand that in the elo system, the starting value is not the defined average value. I dabble in all factions but specialise in one factions. So I play against all factions. Does that mean that my opinion is meaningless?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system

You should understand that in the elo system, the starting value is not the defined average value. I dabble in all factions but specialise in one factions. So I play against all factions. Does that mean that my opinion is meaningless?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system

Many players that are not familiar with Elo's Rating System believe that 1500 is a newcomers rating. Understand this: It is not the case! When a player registers at the ladder he/she gets a rating of 1500, but, that rating is really the expected rating of an average player and not of a newcomer to the game. This means that people that are new to the game or still learning it are expected to have a rating that’s way lower than 1500. It's normal. A player who has been around for a while and knows the game is expected to be average and have around 1500, while a really skilled veteran would have a higher. As a reference, players that have around 2000 are considered strong, and those beyond 2500 grandmasters.

Ladder organizers are saying that around 1500 is an average value. And you are saying that you are "reasonably strong ladder player". I suppose it means "player strong by ladder standards". That doesn't mean that your opinion is meaningless. This means you were not quite correct.

By the way, welcome to the forums! You should have received a better greeting.

Footpad: Slashing melee instead of Bludgeoning (also can unnerf his melee to be 5-2 again. It would be nice if we could get the graphic changed for it too. People are concerned about how it would change Footpad vs HI and I also wonder how it would affect Dwarf vs Drake. I guess it just needs to be tested to see though I don't think it will be a big deal.)

I'd like to look into and test out reducing the Ulf's arcane resist to -20% in order for ghosts to be the true hard counter for them as well.

Orc archers being reverted back to how they were in 1.8 either needs to happen or their XP requirement go up by about 4.

And the big one:Remove the healthy trait from the game, add "hardy" as a trait for all dwarf units that make them only take 6 dmg from poison.

Leaders:
Removing Red and White mages and the Trapper from leader pools and bring the Lieutenant down to 5 MPs (probably bring him back to prenerf values of HPs and dmg too though). I'm still unsure of slowing the Marksman.

"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

I am curious if people who have read the previous post have enough patience to wait until I will create that version of era. And if they have enough prudence to provide a replay showing its flaws instead of making theoretical conclusions.

We could have a competition called "prove that #1 player is wrong" in order to gain some additional attention Sounds good, Cackfiend?

I am curious if people who have read the previous post have enough patience to wait until I will create that version of era. And if they have enough prudence to provide a replay showing its flaws instead of making theoretical conclusions.

We could have a competition called "prove that #1 player is wrong" in order to gain some additional attention Sounds good, Cackfiend?

We have had many people in the past cry about imbalance only to be dominated in the matchup they thought was bad when played vs a good player.

"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

We have had many people in the past cry about imbalance only to be dominated in the matchup they thought was bad when played vs a good player.

Do you mean that player must have a high rating if he wants to discuss the balance? What rating is sufficient in your point of view?

Earlier in this thread Hejnewar said that it makes sense to consider only skilled players when comparing factions vs faction win ratio. A rough estimate of appropriate players was above 1800 points. The lower rating we accept the more samples we will consider, and more samples is better for statistics. However, what is the sufficient minimum rating in your opinion? Also it may make sense to analyze games where both players have relatively similar rating. Do you agree with that and what rating difference would you suggest?

Do you mean that player must have a high rating if he wants to discuss the balance? What rating is sufficient in your point of view?

Earlier in this thread Hejnewar said that it makes sense to consider only skilled players when comparing factions vs faction win ratio. A rough estimate of appropriate players was above 1800 points. The lower rating we accept the more samples we will consider, and more samples is better for statistics. However, what is the sufficient minimum rating in your opinion? Also it may make sense to analyze games where both players have relatively similar rating. Do you agree with that and what rating difference would you suggest?

Any player can discuss balance, however only informed players will have much weight in their opinion. 1800+ is a good number IMO.

"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

I dont play ladder. I have no elo. I like ladder becouse its fun to watch. It seems that sometimes its better to not be a part of something at all and you really doesn't need to ba a part of ladder to play this game on high level, playing custom games for example with good or pro players can also make you high level player.

"Footpad: Slashing melee instead of Bludgeoning (also can unnerf his melee to be 5-2 again. It would be nice if we could get the graphic changed for it too. People are concerned about how it would change Footpad vs HI and I also wonder how it would affect Dwarf vs Drake. I guess it just needs to be tested to see though I don't think it will be a big deal.)"
- Hodor approves. (Foot is already a good unit and this is nice buff.)

"And the big one:
Remove the healthy trait from the game, add "hardy" as a trait for all dwarf units that make them only take 6 dmg from poison." - This is bad, trait that is useless in 3/5 matchups is bad.

Overall - It will be hodor age boys and girls. Chance of getting useless trait for most matchups will scare people off from recruiting dwarfs. And buffs to chaotic units will push them further into their hands. Interesting outcome.

Elves:
"Wose: 0% cold resist" - If I'm not mistaken this should lest adepts 4-shot wo ses at nigh, this helps less aggresive players live during camp games.
"Merman Hunter: +2 hps, 60% Defense in Deep Water" - Why should deep water defense be changed if every other water unit has 50% on it?
"Elvish Shaman: remove Dextrous trait" - This trait is better than strong on her for sure. I think that is a nerf and I dont think she needs one.

Loyalist:
"Spearman: 5-1 ranged" - Why? Spearman isn't event the best main unit out here in my opinion. He is strong but not the best.

Undead:
"Vampire bat: no intelligent trait" - I guess it could make some sense lore-vise?
"Ghost: 19g" - Trading one ghost for one ulf will now be profitable for undead, probably one of the reasons why ghost costs 20g.
"I'd like to look into and test out reducing the Ulf's arcane resist to -20% in order for ghosts to be the true hard counter for them as well." - How dwarf can win after this change if it will make it? (Also thanks to this change thier trait will be even more useless becouse undead will no longer use ghouls.)

Overall - Dwarf will have no counter to ghost except thunderers and they aren't even that good at it and you can always have some skeletons to counter them.

Drakes:
"Drake Fighter: 30% Defense in Shallow Water" -Sounds like buff vs undead (and water units). Heavily depends on map, and good players can already exploit that to some extent.

Northerners:
"5-3 ranged (1.8 ) or 34xp archer?" I will for sure take second option. -1 dmg nerf (-3 overall) and +4xp shouldn't even be compared to each other i think. Even if Orcish Archer is too strong this is just a bit not a lot.

Leadres:
They are strong, but they have lower hp. Leadership is the more more powerful the more movement you have but you still need to play carefully and i have seen some lieutenant deaths due to not playing safe enough. Why Trapper, he is not bad nor good so why him?

"And the big one:
Remove the healthy trait from the game, add "hardy" as a trait for all dwarf units that make them only take 6 dmg from poison." - This is bad, trait that is useless in 3/5 matchups is bad.

Little miscommunication here. Hardy would be something that all Dwarves have and would not take up a trait spot. Healthy is already a mostly useless trait in most matchups. When it was introduced to the game it nerfed Dwarves heavily. The goal here is to make those fat 4mp dudes better.

"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

I dont play ladder. I have no elo. I like ladder becouse its fun to watch. It seems that sometimes its better to not be a part of something at all and you really doesn't need to ba a part of ladder to play this game on high level, playing custom games for example with good or pro players can also make you high level player.

Elves:

"Wose: 0% cold resist" - If I'm not mistaken this should lest adepts 4-shot wo ses at nigh, this helps less aggresive players live during camp games.
"Merman Hunter: +2 hps, 60% Defense in Deep Water" - Why should deep water defense be changed if every other water unit has 50% on it? Same reason I got the Glider changed to 40% defense on deep water. Balancing. When speaking of ladder balance we are strictly talking about 1v1 matchups. Wesnoth as a game was never balanced as a 1v1 game per the devs.
"Elvish Shaman: remove Dextrous trait" - This trait is better than strong on her for sure. I think that is a nerf and I dont think she needs one.

Loyalist:
"Spearman: 5-1 ranged" - Why? Spearman isn't event the best main unit out here in my opinion. He is strong but not the best.Because spearman is too strong vs drakes, mostly. Also it is the best unit.

Undead:
"Vampire bat: no intelligent trait" - I guess it could make some sense lore-vise?
"Ghost: 19g" - Trading one ghost for one ulf will now be profitable for undead, probably one of the reasons why ghost costs 20g.
"I'd like to look into and test out reducing the Ulf's arcane resist to -20% in order for ghosts to be the true hard counter for them as well." - How dwarf can win after this change if it will make it? (Also thanks to this change thier trait will be even more useless becouse undead will no longer use ghouls.)

Overall - Dwarf will have no counter to ghost except thunderers and they aren't even that good at it and you can always have some skeletons to counter them. Ghost should still win vs Ulf during day. It's been a long time but I believe the change would make it so that that dont get stomped by Ulf during dusk/dawn

Drakes:
"Drake Fighter: 30% Defense in Shallow Water" -Sounds like buff vs undead (and water units). Heavily depends on map, and good players can already exploit that to some extent.

Northerners:
"5-3 ranged (1.8 ) or 34xp archer?" I will for sure take second option. -1 dmg nerf (-3 overall) and +4xp shouldn't even be compared to each other i think. Even if Orcish Archer is too strong this is just a bit not a lot. Around the time orc archers were heavily buffed to 6-3 from 5-3 ranged. Many of us thought it was a bad decision. I still do.

Leadres:
They are strong, but they have lower hp. Leadership is the more more powerful the more movement you have but you still need to play carefully and i have seen some lieutenant deaths due to not playing safe enough. Why Trapper, he is not bad nor good so why him?

Edit:
When did these changes were created?this is all taken from the wesnoth ladder forum several years ago

"There's no love in fear." - Maynard James Keenan

I'm the guy who's responsible for 40% Gliders in all hexes... I can now die a happy man. =D

Footpad: Slashing melee instead of Bludgeoning (also can unnerf his melee to be 5-2 again. It would be nice if we could get the graphic changed for it too.

The problem here is that I can't make art. I will change the attack type, but not the graphic. For the initial version I think that is ok. Perhaps someone who can make art will decide to help us with that later.

Remove the healthy trait from the game, add "hardy" as a trait for all dwarf units that make them only take 6 dmg from poison.

This is the most tricky thing from the coding point of view. I will be able achieve the desired result. But the problem is that poisoning logic is hardcoded inside the engine. I can't make the UI to show the red number 6 instead of 8 when poison changes HP amount. It should be something like red 8 and then green 2. In the edge case when unit's health is below 8HP it should be still a single red number, e.g. red 5 if unit had 6 HP.

I am updating this post viewtopic.php?f=15&t=49889&start=45#p643231 time after time posting what changes were made to the default era (see the end of the post). I have reviewed until 1.10 and the era is the same, practically speaking. According to github 1.10 was released on Jan 22, 2012.

I just wanted to add on to some balancing ideas. I think a ladder era is a really nice idea and I would love to have it on wesnoth

Here is my personal take on some things...Objections here and there too maybe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Factions should be balanced based on map. The faction should have equal chances against each other on an entirely flat map. I would actually disagree with many and go as far as to say Isar's Cross should be used as the staple for tweaking units. Isar uses every terrain; sand, forest, mountain, flat, etc. It is a very good map for balancing. It also is 4p and not 2p, therefore balancing can stem out to all other game modes.

According to the statistic that undead has a low win rate, I would say it definitely needs a balance.

My idea for balancing undead was to maybe add more health (+5?) and maybe resistance to ghouls, making them hard to kill. This could make them a prudent defense for houses (although skeleton is good house defense against knalgan even in day). Undead seems way too weak for sure though.

Related, the loyalist combination of heavy infantryman + mage (and horseman for scouts) seems too powerful because the heavy infantry man is very resistant and a heavy hitter, whilst the mage is a heavy magic hitter. I think in order to balance this, make heavy infantryman more expensive, like as expensive as knights. So 24g.

In order to balance Knalgans against Rebels (rebels have a somewhat substantial advantage against knalgans it is not really even fair), I think add some sort of magic/arcane attack somewhere. Every faction has magic except for knalgans, but why?

I think maybe if you made some unit have an arcane attack or something like that (stalwart?), then that would help knalgans be a more flexible faction that can basically handle loyalists better...It could be a good counter to spearmen in good terrain maybe. Add new unit like runemaster from AoE; it can have a magic hammer and wesnoth is supposed to be a fantasy game after all :shrug:

Unfortunately shaman and fighters (and well mages) are quite strong against all the dwarf lines.

I noticed that the drake statistic is highest and undead statistic is lowest, yet drake is the only faction that undead has a significant/organic chance against due to the dynamic nature i guess. I guess that's why its important for the OP to note that drake stat should be entirely ignored. Yeah I think in actuality it would be somewhere towards the middle.

Undead is really bad but fair against drakes. Also drakes is worse against loyalist than it is against undead. However drakes are really good against rebels because the fire and swords counter the woses, and the units are stronger than the fighters and archers (even on forest terrain). And drakes are moderately balanced against rest of factions.

I think in order to balance drakes vs rebels, the shaman should have their slow effect last for two turns. This would help mitigate counterattacks from the drakes.

As Hejnewar said, Drake vs Undead is balanced (I think drake is the only faction that undead has a chance against actually), just be the first one to strike yeah.

Just maneuver so that you do not strike second. This is a good example where things like health doesn't matter as much, for sure. However undead are really underpowered due to their extremely low health and things like that. But against drake they can have good chances because health doesn't matter as much if they strike first.

Map size doesn't really matter that much for balancing factions again we should balance factions according to the map. It is how the players use the factions that matter more I think. I mean just the technique.

Given equal technique I think all factions might draw no matter the size of the map, except for maybe undead which is why I suggest something to boost ghouls.

I will conclude with somewhat of a TL;DR...
For loyalists, make heavy infantryman more expensive. Maybe remove the unit even. It is very powerful in general (especially against skeletons). No change for northerners as far as I am concerned. Rebels should have shaman with slow that lasts two turns. Drakes no change I think. Knalgans have magic and maybe new unit. Undead make the ghouls stronger and more tank-like.